Saturday, March 31, 2007

While some congressmanwork to advance al-Qaeda's aims within the United States, others work to further their aims outside the room...Left Wingnut Nancy Pelosi is making pilgrimage to Damascus, to honor and supplicate before despot and terrorist Bashar Al-Assad:

After media inquiries, Pelosi's office issued a statement. "As recommended by the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan delegation led by Speaker Pelosi intends to discuss a wide range of security issues affecting the United States and the Middle East with representatives of governments in the region, including Syria," the statement read.

Great idea - British patience and discussions with Iran has certainly changed their relationship! The once-mighty Brits are now reduced to bowing and scraping supplicants, begging the Iranians for the return of their sailors and Marines, and pleading with the UN for help in crafting strongly-worded statements.That's progress, for sure - well, for the mullahs at least, and isn't that the aim of the Democrats in Congress today? After all, who benefits most from an immediate American troop withdrawal from Iraq? The Iranians and al-Qaeda, first and foremost (certainly not the Iraqi people!). And who benefits the most from congressional Democrats whom state emphatically that we will not go to warwith Iran? Why, the mullahs, again! Nothing like knowing you cannot be punished for your actions to really inhibit you, right?White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said yesterday of Pelosi's visit: "Someone should take a step back and think about the message that it sends and the message that it sends to our allies."I'm more afraid of the message it sends to Syria, Iran and Hezbollah - why should these countries cooperate at all with the United States when Pelosi comes abroad and assures them she will allow no military retribution for their misdeeds, and tells them how they will get so much more respect and obedience from a Democratic Congressional/Presidential combo that she will guarentee them will be in place in just over a year and a half?Her delegation includes Reps. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the House's only Muslim lawmaker; Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.); Nick J. Rahall II (D-W.Va.); and David L. Hobson (R-Ohio).These men and women are more interested in undermining Administration foreign policy and furthering their own agenda of appeasement and surrender than actually doing the right thing for the peoples of the Middle East, or the people of America, who they claim falsely to represent.Remember their names.Traitors, all.

"Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."Terrifying stuff over at iranian.com:"Every stratagem," means every stratagem. No heinous act is out of bounds for these savages. They place children, for instance, in the backseat of a car bomb so that it could be waved through checkpoints without inspection. Then, the adults park the car in the midst of a shopping crowd, run out of the car and detonate it with the children inside. Horrific? Shocking? Absolutely barbaric? These are the same people who used thousands of Iranian children as minesweepers during the Iran-Iraq war to clear a path for their more valued armored vehicles.Misguided advocates of negotiation with the mullahs, beware. The mullahs are on an Allah-mandated mission. They are intoxicated with Petrodollars and aim to settle for nothing less than complete domination of the world under the Islamic ummeh. It is precisely for this reason that they consider America and the West as "Ofooli," setting-dying system, while they believe their Islamism as "Tolooi," rising-living order. They are in no mood of negotiating for anything less than the total surrender of democracy, the very anathema to Islamism.Read it all....

Thursday, March 29, 2007

My congressman, Rush Holt (D-NJ). continues to side with America’s enemies, this time supporting one of their most nefarious tactics yet. I’ll let Michelle Malkingive us the intro:

EARLIER this month, six publicity-seeking imams filed a federal lawsuit against US Airways and Minneapolis/St. Paul's Metropolitan Airports Commission. The Muslim clerics were removed from their flight last November and questioned for several hours after their suspicious behavior alarmed both passengers and crew members. Katherine Kersten of The Minneapolis Star Tribune reported last week that the imams, advised by the grievance- mongers at the Council on American-Islamic Relations, also plan to sue "John Does" - innocent bystanders who alerted the authorities about their security concerns.Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) has introduced legislation to protect John Does who report suspicious behavior from legal liability..

Now to LGF, who tells us a little more about the congressional tiff that followed:

House Republicans tonight surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity — the first step by lawmakers to protect “John Doe” airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.

After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats’ Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121. Republicans said the lawsuit filed by six Muslim imams against US Airways and “John Does,” passengers who reported suspicious behavior, could have a “chilling effect” on passengers who may fear being sued for acting vigilant.

Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, offered the motion saying all Americans — airline passengers included — must be protected from lawsuits if they report suspicious behavior that may foreshadow a terrorist attack.

LGF urges us to go to the roll callvote to see which representatives are in CAIR’s pocket (121 Nays, all Democrats – what a shock!) And a quick click told us exactly what we expected:

NaysHolt

Holt is not stupid, he is an active tool of the Islamist interests.He knows that by allowing agitators like the alleged imans above to sue witnesses, people will hesitate to report suspected terrorist activities. Holt is essentially an accessory to the next terror attack that happens on American soil,for he is supporting the rights of the Islamists to silence those who would report their murderous activites.

Better for you, your family, and your children to be dead in Rush Holt’s America than to report possible terrorist action. Death pales before multiculturalism (or Islamic rule?). It’s sick, but believe it – it’s right in the roll call….

This is not new behavior for my congressional cockroach; Rush Holt fights harder against American interests and for Islamic / terrorist interests than virtually any other Congressman in the House. Certainly, he is a huge supporter of surrendering Iraq to al-Qaeda; he relentlessly votes for withdrawal while refusing to acknowledge what the consequences might be for this country, and the Iraqi people, if we do. Coward.

Let’s try to shame our treasonous congressman with some more bravery from Miss Malkin, as she makes her vow to protect America from Holt’s allies:

You don't know me. But I am on the lookout for you. You are my enemy. And I am yours.I am John Doe.I will act when homeland security officials ask me to "report suspicious activity."I will embrace my local police department's admonition: "If you see something, say something."I will protest your Jew-hating, America-bashing "scholars." I will petition against your hate-mongering mosque leaders.I will raise my voice against your subjugation of women and religious minorities.I will challenge your attempts to indoctrinate my children in our schools.I will not be censored in the name of tolerance. I will not be cowed by your Beltway lobbying groups in moderates' clothing. I will not cringe when you shriek about "profiling" or "Islamophobia."I will put my family's safety above sensitivity. I will put my country above multiculturalism.I will not submit to your will. I will not be intimidated.I am John Doe.

Finally, I call out for one more act of courage – who will run against Holt in 2008? Can the Republican party find a decent candidate to run against this man, who constantly votes with the hard-left of his party, a line that very few of his constituents (even Democrats) endorse?

Where is the candidate that will stand up against the sickness of Rush Holt?

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

The Iranian government may be held by mad messianic mullahs, but that doesn't mean that they are necessarily stupid...with the state of the British Navy, what better time to launch an attack against their personnel? A devastating analysis from the New York Post:

IT'S been a tough month for the British Navy. On March 7, it learned that Tony Blair's Labor government was going ahead with drastic cuts in its budget and number of ships. By this time next year, the once-vaunted Royal Navy will be about the size of the Belgian Navy, while its officers face a five-year moratorium on all promotions.If that wasn't demoralizing enough, last Friday the Iranian Navy seized a patrol boat containing 15 British sailors and Marines, claiming they'd crossed into Iranian waters. They're now hostages and may well go on trial as spies.

The latest report is that the Britons were ready to fight off their abductors. Certainly their escorting ship, HMS Cornwall, could have blown the Iranian naval vessel out of the water. However, at the last minute the British Ministry of Defense ordered the Cornwall not to fire, and her captain and crew were forced to watch their shipmates led away into captivity. There was a question whether the Blair government would end up leaving Britain with a navy too small to protect its shores. Now it seems to want a navy that can't even protect its own sailors.

Seems like the Iranians may have found their new Jimmy Carter in Mr. Blair - he's trapped, forced by the code of EU non-violence to limit his actions to strongly worded statements and the threat of more strongly worded statements. Should he react militarily, it is in essence a rebuke of the EU ideal that all conflicts can be resolved diplomatically. By possibly saving his own sailors (which, apparently, is a job our sailors might wind up doing due to Blair's insane military cutbacks), he could be severly undermining the EU in the process. What kind of pressure is Blair facing from his neighbors in Europe not to take any action at all; to "wait it out"?

Blair and the Brits should remember 1979 - the taking of the U.S. Embassy and its staff as hostages for 444 days, while a cowardly president tied ribbons around trees and pleaded for their release, destroyed American credibility around the world for years, and created the "paper tiger" meme that led to further terrorist attacks upon our forces and institutions worldwide.

If you can't back up your words with actions, nobody will take you seriously, and then you are in some deep sh*t. Blair is in a tough spot - his soft allies in the E-Union would frown upon any military action, while Blair's own weaking of his once-vaunted Navy has made any action that much more difficult to undertake. And if he doesn't act, the sight of him standing by helplesly as British sailors are manhandled through an Islamic show trial will weaken the international position of England to a point where their influence on foreign affairs will be greatly diminished.

Not a good spot to be in, but one cannot say that events were not leading up to this moment...how Tony Blair plays the cards he has dealt himself here will affect Britain and the West for the next decade. One can only hope he holds some of that staunch British blood within him; along with some of the strength and courage that has served that one-great nation so well for so long...Well, maybe Mr. Blair will get lucky, after all...Scappleface gives us the outcome that the Left will insist is realistic:

(2007-03-27) — Iran announced today that it would release immediately the 15 British soldiers and marines it took hostage last week to avoid further “cordial pressure and devastating pleasantries” from British Prime Minister Tony Blair.“In this test of wills,” said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, “we acknowledge the superior power of the adversary. We cannot withstand another onslaught of polite diplomatic language nor the withering, if unspoken, consternation we detect in the eyes of Tony Blair....

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

…when he famously remarked, “When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use.”

Although Little Green Footballsis unsure whether it was Stalin or Lenin that made the comment, our man Charles adds:

Islamists won’t even have to buy the rope. The purblind multiculturalists will hand it to them and put it around their own necks.

So where am I going with this? Here – via Gateway Pundit, we get the following report:

A British-made aircraft has been sold to Iran, the first new Western-made aircraft acquired by Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution, an adviser to the deal said on Monday. The 10-seater Britten Norman Islander aircraft was delivered to Iran's Civil Aviation Organisation last week, said Dean Ghobadi, commercial director of PAAviation, which provides aviation products and services to Iran."This hasn't happened since 1979," said Ghobadi. "The Iranians are delighted and have expressed interest in a further five aircraft".

And they should be delighted! What’s next – foreign nations selling them the nuclear technology they crave in order to rule the world under a 12th century Caliphate? Oh, wait…..

Lenin, too, was right- just replace Soviet/Communist with Arab/Islamist:

Capitalists the world over and their governments will, in their desire to win Soviet market, shut their eyes to the above-mentioned activities and thus be turned into blind deaf-mutes. They will furnish credits, which will serve as a means of supporting the Communist parties in their countries, and, by supplying us, will rebuild our war industry, which is essential for our future attacks on our suppliers.In other words, they will be laboring to prepare their own suicide....

Monday, March 26, 2007

There is very little in the way of irony coming out of Duluththese days:

DULUTH, Minn., Feb. 27 (UPI) -- Officials from the Global Warming 101 expedition in Canada have confirmed that team member Elizabeth Andre has been evacuated.Andre was reportedly evacuated after suffering frostbitten fingertips while setting up camp on Canada's Baffin Island. The 1,200-mile expedition to visit five native villages, led by Ely's Will Steger, is part of an effort to call attention to global warming, Minnesota's Duluth News Tribune reported. Temperatures were below zero Saturday night when Andre suffered the frostbite....

To that, I can add nothing whatsoever....

Now the folks in the letters sectionof today's New York Post have some choice words for The Goracle:

Global warming is the biggest scam since global cooling....

....it is a campaign to stop and turn back economic progress, thus stopping the continuous increase in the health, wealth and well-being of humanity as a whole.It is a tragedy in the making for the 21st century.

Watching Gore testify on Capitol Hill, I thought I was looking at a designated hitter on a Major League Baseball roster.He was more bloated than his teammates, took swings at the opposition, to the delight of his hometown fans, and he never had to field his position.

And why are there still some holdouts who still believe that the earth is round, that planets orbit the sun, and that global warming is overhyped leftist, luddite propoganda?CBS's website pushes the "All Conservatives are Stupid" meme:

The easy answer is that Republicans are just tools of the energy industry. It's certainly true that many of them are....

The truth is more complicated — and more depressing: A small number of hard-core ideologues (some, but not all, industry shills) have led the thinking for the whole conservative movement.

For the most part leftists use this "stupid" tactic in order to avoid actually having to intellectually engage with someone who thinks differently than they. After all ... you really don't have to consider the opinions offered by someone who disagrees with you if you can successfully and falsely brand them as ignorant.

...the graph for average daily visits to my blog looked frighteningly familiar. By consulting my scientific sources (i.e. I googled it) I was able to find a graph showing the recent increase in average global temperatures.Sure enough, when I superimposed the two graphs, an inconvenient truth emerged.....

So it has been exactly two years since I started this blog - the so-called “blogiversary”, if you will...I’ve seen some bloggers practically dislocate their shoulders patting themselves on the back on this occasion; not quite my style. But I will say that I started blogging really as a way to get my thoughts on the world as it is (and as it should be) out of my head and onto “paper”, virtual though it may be. Blogging became a way to vent, more than anything else. I thought I would eventually spend out my frustration, and become bored with writing for an invisible audience, leaving my URL to die on the vine, more a snapshot of a few months in my life than anything else.Turned out different than I expected, like so much in life…I enjoyed it more than I thought; and what started out as a hobby now borders on an obsession; one that I occasionally need to force myself to walk away from. Bottom line – nothing’s over; hopefully I’ve just begun (which is a strange thing to say on my 904th post!).And a big thanks to the thousands upon thousands whom have stopped by to pay a visit; to read, to write, to sneer…I have actually learned from my comments that there are more people than I thought who can respectfully disagree based upon solid argumentation; I’ve enjoyed some of that give and take tremendously; it has broadened me and tempered me.

And the most important thing that I have discovered, to my great relief, is that there is a vast number of intelligent Americans on both side of the aisle who actually do dissect issues and make value judgements that are part of a thought-out process. The talking heads in the mainstream media bemoan the “ignorant Americans” whom they claim pay no attention to the travails of the world today; yet the mere existence of the blogosphere, “run” almost entirely by private citizens, debunks that myth (or is it a conceit?). The average blogger speaks for more people than your run-of-the-mill newspaper columnist or televised talking head (and generally writes better as well); and that simple fact has given me renewed confidence in America’s ability to chose wisely, and correctly…

And finally, thanks to my fellow bloggers for the occasional link; the fact that I have written something that another would think to recommend is the highest compliment I can think of.Again, my very humble thanks.Now, back to work…

Sunday, March 25, 2007

...that the recent siezure of 15 British sailors is only the first of manyupcomingIranian reprisal actions:

Our military sources report that Middle East and Persian Gulf nations as well as the US and UK are bracing for further Iranian marine, air or terrorist operations in Iraq and other places in reprisal for the sanctions measure before the UN Security Council in New York. On the ready too are the Saudi armed forces and some Israeli air and naval units. According to Iranian sources the 15 British Royal navy seamen and marines which an Iranian warship seized with their commando craft Friday, March 23, will be put on trial. DEBKAfile’s military sources say the incident was but a pretext.According to incoming intelligence, Tehran plans to release a series of reprisals after sanctions are approved...President Mahmoud Admadinejad’s last-minute cancellation of his appearance before the Security Council is further indication that Tehran gave up on diplomatic maneuvers for pre-empting the sanctions resolution and, assuming their approval was not preventable, turned instead to ramping up military tensions. ....Thursday, DEBKAfile reported exclusively a rendezvous Wednesday between the French nuclear carrier Charles de Gaulle and its task force with the USS John C. Stennis in the Arabian Sea Wednesday for joint missions....Its arrival raises to four the number of Western aircraft carriers cruising within striking distance of Iran...The Charles de Gaulle is accompanied by French Task Force 473, which consists of five warships....

Oh boy, here we go...does Admadinejad believe it is 1979 all over again?And could he actually be right?

And I am surprised, truthfully, that more folks have not referenced this little summertime waras fairly analogous to the actions we are seeing from Iran today....

Saturday, March 24, 2007

Craig Carton and Ray Rossi think mental illness is hilarious and Asian-Americans are best mocked with sing-song Chinese accents. The men, hosts of an afternoon radio show called “The Jersey Guys” that is heard here on WKXW (101.5 FM), favor adjectives for politicians that have to be bleeped out.

The Times needs to discredit our locals, because they dared to use the public airwaves to express opinions in opposition to those found on their editorial pages:

Two weeks ago, Mr. Carton and Mr. Rossi started “Operation Rat a Rat/La Cucha Gotcha,” a listener-participation game that encourages people to turn in friends, neighbors and “anyone suspicious” to immigration authorities.They introduced the segment with mariachi music and set the campaign to end on May 5 (Cinco de Mayo), a well-known Mexican holiday.

Well, what is wrong with that? Why shouldn't people be encouraged to notify the authorities when they are in the presence of lawbreakers? Oh, I see - because it is a law that the Times feels shouldn't be enforced. The only thing that should be enforced, according to their mindset, is higher taxes levied against the likes of middle class New Jerseyans like yours truly - taxes that are deployed to give benefits to illegal immigrants within the state that even I, a law-abiding citizen, cannot enjoy.

Then the Times tries to drum up an imaginary outcry against the Jersey Guys, but finds only one supplicant stupid enough to do their bidding:

Here in New Jersey, where 15 percent of the population is Hispanic, reaction to the show has not exactly been positive.“Scapegoating and stereotyping Latinos does nothing but give bigoted individuals a platform to make ethnic slurs and racist comments,” said Assemblyman Wilfredo Caraballo of Newark, calling the campaign a “publicity stunt” that could incite violence against Hispanics.

Sounds like Caraballo has been reading from the CAIR handbook - protect criminals by accusing those whom would pursue them of imaginary, uncommitted crimes.And alas, the Times could find no justice, no solace, no groveling when the Jersey Guys held a news conference:

But anyone expecting an apology was sorely disappointed when Mr. Carton and Mr. Rossi held an on-air news conference a few hours after Mr. Caraballo’s comments. Seeking to profit from the recently ignited firestorm, the Jersey Guys gathered a corps of journalists, most of them Hispanic, in their Trenton studios and gleefully refused to back down.

After calling Assemblyman Caraballo a “pathetic liar,” Mr. Carton repeated his call to deport every illegal immigrant in the country. “If you’re here illegally, you are breaking the law — no better, no worse than the guy who robs the liquor store or the guy who waits to case your house out and robs you of your belongings,” he said. “You are a criminal.”

He went on to blame illegal immigrants for the state’s high property taxes, problems with uninsured drivers and violent crime....

Seems as if the Times is trying to make the Guys look crazy. But they're not - they're right about the effects of unbridled illegal immigration into the state. The Times offers no evidence to counter Carton's comments, only snide inferences (like "seeking to profit")- the last resort of a man (or paper) that has lost the argument. They essentially admit it here:

Judging from the cascade of congratulatory calls, the men have tapped into an angry vein in the state, where, according to 2005 census figures, 20 percent of all residents are foreign born, the third highest rate in the country. “This is an invasion,” said one caller, Carmen Perez, who said she had come to this country as a 3-year-old. “I would deport most of them.”

They end off this hatchet-type journalism by warning vaguely about the retributive forces of "Hispanic anger". But the Times, who calculates all things on race, is assuming that all Latinos think alike. What about the unfairness to those Hispanics who came to this country via a tortuous immigration system, worked hard, followed the rules, and got resident status/citizenship? How supportive are they of those who try to skip the line by taking an illegal route into this country? Why does the Times assume these honest Americans will stick up for the cheaters and liars, just because they are from the same hemisphere? This is a racial calculation by the Times, and one that will not hold up as real-life events unfold....The very fact that the Jersey Guys have driven state officials and politicians into blinding fits of rage is a good thing in a place where virtually no public officials are held accountable for their actions. We support the Guys and 101.5 here, and praise their unwillingness to back down to the media or race-hustlers like Caraballo. Don't give up the fight!

...says Passionate America...and check out some other commentary found 'round the 'sphere on the Iranian abduction of 15 British sailors:

The Strata-Sphere:It is stupid because now it is clear to everyone Iran’s beligerence is dangerous and out of control. What concerns me is why do this unless you had something in your hip pocket and you were going to play some poker. Why do this kind of escalation? And what will our Democrats do - say the West cannot confront Iran? Talk about bad timing. We are heading into some seriously perilous times right now. We have amassed a large navy force in the region, so we could respond.

I love this from the Beeb article. They can’t kidnap our sailors — we have a resolution from the UN!

In a statement, leader of the Liberal Democrats, Sir Menzies Campbell, also called for their immediate release.“Whatever the rights and wrongs of military action, British forces in Iraq are now there with the authority of a UN security council resolution… and the Iranian government should be left in no doubt of the serious implications of their action,” he said.

Is this an intentional act approved by senior Iranian leadership in response to findings of the British personnel, or possibly in reaction to the upcoming U.N. vote against Iran?....Is this a provocation similar to the Hezbollah seizure last year of Israeli soldiers, which led the Israelis into invading Lebanon, to test how the British and Americans move military assets in advance of armed action?

...no one has mentioned that this latest outrage by Iran has crossed a line of great significance. If satellite tracking proves that the British were indeed in Iraqi or international waters at the time of their capture, then Iran is not only in the wrong, but it has just, according to classical international law doctrine, also committed an act of war which hands the Coalition the legal right to respond accordingly....

But I'll leave you with the Washington Post, which, acting in its role as the terrorist's homepage, figures out a way to blame the United States for an Iranian act of war:

The seizure may have been a reprisal for the U.S. detention of five Iranian Revolutionary Guard operatives during a January raid of the Iranian government's liaison office in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil, the U.S. and Western officials said........Iran has been demanding their release publicly and in private meetings.....Somehow, I don't think the Brits will be buying that line - although the BBC just might....

Friday, March 23, 2007

New Jersey would become the first state in the nation to require pregnant women and newborns to be tested for HIV under a proposal unveiled yesterday.Senate President Richard Codey said he will introduce legislation to require testing for all pregnant women and newborns, unless the mother specifically chooses in writing to reject the test.

....The key in the fight against HIV and AIDS is early detection and treatment," said Codey, a Democrat...

....The bill would require all pregnant women be tested for HIV as early as possible in their pregnancy and again during their third trimester.Each birthing facility in the state would be required to test every newborn in its care for HIV.

This gets me angrier than it probably should - but considering that a large majority of women do NOT engage in this type of risky behavior, why should they, and their newborns, be forced to undergo additional testing?

Despite the scare tactics of the AIDS activists, HIV in this country is for the most part confined to people who engage in unsafe sexual practices with multiple partners (often of the same sex), and needle-drug addicts who share "utensils". To force all women, and their babies, to undergo multiple testing for this disease is liberal madness run amok. Obviously, the disease is more prevalent in poorer areas; why not just institute testing there? Oh, right, that would not be "politically correct". Instead, let us impose by the force of law that all pregnant women must be tested at least twice for a disease that is likely statistically insignificant in many New Jersey counties. And let's grab their babies out of their arms and take an extra pint from them as well.

Hey Cody - you want to legislate some tests? I have an idea - how about a lie detector test for all politicians in New Jersey before they can file for candidacy? I mean, I know that MOST of them are clean (yeah, right), but the percentage of corrupt politicians in New Jersey is likely far greater than the percentage of HIV babies in the state. With the high cost of throwing crooked pols out of office, we can never start testing them too early, right? What did you say - "early detection and treatment" is key? On that, I think we can agree.....

Geez, if the top guy at the EU is saying these things, maybe we should take note:Europe's citizens must be on their guard against political correctness and moralising politicians, says the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso in an interview with The Daily Telegraph.The former Portuguese premier and centre-Right politician is concerned that freedom can be the loser in European culture wars over climate change, cheap air travel, Islam and free speech.Violent protests on the continent, in the Middle East and in Asia followed the publication in a Danish newspaper of cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Mohammed and the Pope faced calls to apologise after a speech on theology and the origins of Islam sparked international controversy.But Mr Barroso backs the right to offend."We have to show respect for all communities but the fundamental right of freedom of expression is for me more important than other collective rights," he says.As the European Union prepares to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the founding Treaty of Rome, Mr Barroso insists that the rights of the individual, within the law, over moral strictures from either secular or religious communities, are sacred.

Paul Belien at the Brussels Journalspeaks in much the same way of the EU bureaucrats who are slowly, but steadily and by design, ascending to power:... most of the politicians driving this engine are deeply influenced by the mentality of the French revolutionaries. Their ideology is secularist, universalist and constructivist. They are rationalist technocrats who deeply believe that the state is the legitimate bestower of liberties to the people and is to take care of the citizens from the cradle to the grave. They also believe that they know better than the people what is good for the people. Most of them are genuinely convinced that they are leading the Europeans to a perfect democracy. And, paradoxically, because they genuinely believe this, they cannot tolerate that the people at this very moment decide democratically about their own future.

Kinda describes Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party, to a "T", doesn't it?But it could never happen here....

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Powerlinereports the facts:How many times have you heard that President Bush's approval ratings are low? Guess what: the Democratic Congress's approval rating is lower.For some reason, this hasn't been getting much press. But the low esteem in which voters held Congress prior to November's election barely changed after the Democrats took power in January. Today, Gallup notes that the modest bounce Congress experienced in January and February is now gone:

The modest uptick in approval of the job being done by Congress has dissipated for the most part after only two months.According to Gallup's monthly update on job approval of Congress -- in a March 11-14, 2007, national poll -- 28% of Americans approve of the job being done by Congress and 64% disapprove.

From Real Clear Politics, home to all polls both great and small, we get a composite average of President Bush's approval ratings:President Bush Job ApprovalApprove:34.3%Disapprove:60.0%I'll grant you that this is still pretty poor, but one must note that Bush's approval ratings are over 20% higher than the Democratic Congress. We predict this spread will increase in the coming weeks - what with the Democrats working furiously for an American defeat in Iraq, their absolute gorging at the taxpayer trough, and their penchant for Congressional hearings on every sparrow that falls across the nation (egged on by an utterly clueless, out-of-touch media), we think, as Powerline does, that the Democrats will long for the day they had a 28% approval rating....

The Washington Post has a number of columns today urging immediate withdrawal from Iraq. However, methinks our esteemed essayists have no idea what a 'consequence" is, or what the definition of "morality" might be.First up is E.J Dionne:But those who spent the past four years hyping threats, underestimating costs, ignoring rational warnings, painting unrealistic futures and savaging their opponents have been discredited. This awakening is the first step toward rebuilding our country's influence and power.While I too find the hyping of threats (and of our enemy's strenghts) downright dangerous; I am taking Dionne here to mean that the world would be a safer place with Saddam Hussien still running Iraq. Saddam - a man whom fought an eight year war with Iran (that cost over a million lives), a man who invaded and raped Kuwait, who bombed Israel, gassed the Kurds, and funded terrorists worldwide, not to mention tormenting vast segments of his own population. Yes, Dionne says we would be better off with this monster still in place - and by retreating from this fight, by saying we are sorry for deposing him, by apologizing to the French for not heeding their superior wisdom, we can rebuild our nation's "influence and power".Does this man ever stop to think before he writes? For sure he doesn't think of the consequences of the policies he offers - after all, once we leave - with the job unfinished - who does he think will take over in Iraq? Dionne can't tell you, because he knows nothing would harm America's influence and power more than to see Iraq spin into madness....Next genius up to the plate is reactionary racist Eugene Robinson, who tell us there is "No Time for Patience in Iraq":The president says all he wants is a little forbearance while his so-called "surge" plan is given time to work. But most Americans have long since run out of patience....They....abandoned the traditional U.S. "honest broker" position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

George Bush, Dick Cheney and the rest of this administration encountered a dangerous, unstable Middle East and proceeded to make it more dangerous and more unstable.And we're supposed to have just a little more patience, because, as the president said, "there's a lot more work" to be done? I'd say they've already done more than enough, wouldn't you?So get out, now! Don't try to fix the problem, run away! Who cares if the "surge" is showing a positive effect, we can't take the chance that it may work! And while we are doing it, let's throw our arms around our good friends, the peaceful Palestinians!And why do we stick with the Israelis, Mr. Robinson? Because they have the money and power to influence Washington, you say? No, because Americans are a moral people...and what is morality, you ask? I'll let Ayn Rand school you:"What is morality?" she asked."Judgement to distinguish right and wrong, vision to see the truth, courage to act upon it, dedication to that which is good, integrity to stand by the good at any price. Get it, Eugene? Israelis the good in that hellhole of a region - and that's why if we are to be honest brokers, we must stand with them.Dear God, there's more - Richard Cohen, vilest of the bottom-dwellers, says calling dead American soldiers "wasted lives" is a phrase that should be more in vouge. Not because he hates the troops, you see - But some sort of finger has to be pointed at the president and some sort of reminder offered that it is not just a policy that has failed but that people have been killed or wounded.So dead soldiers need to be tossed about as a political tool to bring down the President! But hey, Cohen supports the troops! Don't say otherwise - you'd be questioning his patriotism!Finally Anne Applebaum notes that the world has noted with a shrug and a yawn the confessions of al-Qaeda mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed, architect of 9/11. She blames America.I blame the world. And I blame Anne, for helping to create the enviornment which allows the world to shrug with a feeling of moral smugness....

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

From Evan Nappen, a practicing New Jersey attorney (and a damn good one, apparently), we learn about a recent State Superior Court decision that actually upholds the Second Amendment, as opposed to dousing it in favor of whatever new politically correct ideas have floated, like so much flotsam and jetsam, through the legal arena:

In a landmark written opinion filed February 27, a New Jersey Superior Court recognized the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and held that a citizen’s Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms cannot be involuntarily waived under a New Jersey firearms forfeiture law.“The recognition of Second Amendment rights in New Jersey is long overdue,” said attorney Evan F. Nappen....

In the New Jersey case, the appellant was denied re-issuance of his Firearms Purchaser ID card based on his consent to relinquish firearms seized in a domestic dispute in 2000. In 2004, New Jersey enacted a law barring Firearms Purchaser ID cards to any person whose firearms have been seized and not returned.The Honorable John H. Pursel, J.S.C. held that the statute did not apply and the Firearms Purchaser ID card should be issued because the appellant did not know that his prior consent to relinquish his firearms would subject him to permanent loss of his Second Amendment rights under the 2004 law.

The ruling states in key part:

Egregious deprivation would surely be the result if this applicant were precluded from obtaining a firearms purchaser identification card by virtue of the fact that he consensually surrendered his weapons at a time when it was impossible for him to have known that such action would later subject him to lifelong deprivation of his second amendment right.Additionally, it is clear that in consenting to the disposition of the weapons seized as a result of the temporary restraining order, the applicant did not intend to waive his right to bear arms as provided by the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Scary how quickly the state and federal governments are willing and anxious to suspend constitutional rights, even in an "ex-post facto' case like the one above. A great job by Mr. Nappen and Co.; it's a win for all of us...

But never fear, lefties, for the Warren County Prosecutor has filed a notice of appeal in the case. More taxpayers dollars wasted in an attempt to curtail the rights of honest citizens.

....sorry about the lack of posting; I have finally caught the bug that seems to have hit everyone in the tri-state area over the past three months....I admit I was feeling kind of superhuman as my friends, family, and co-workers went down one by one (and sometimes twice); I was able to brag that my generally poor diet and and erratic lifestyle was the cure to, not the cause of, all that ails ya....

Sunday, March 18, 2007

...or maybe we should call it Sunday Morning Stupidity? 'Cause there seems to be quite a bitof it running about today:

New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin has suggested that the slow recovery and rebuilding of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina -- which has prevented many black former residents from returning -- is part of a plan to change the racial makeup and political leadership of his and other cities. "Ladies and gentlemen, what happened in New Orleans could happen anywhere," Nagin said at a dinner sponsored by the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a trade group for newspapers that target black readers. "They are studying this model of natural disasters, dispersing the community and changing the electoral process in that community."

Well, Nagin tried his best to keep New Orleans a "chocolate city" - as Katrina raged, he let hundreds of buses that could have been used to evacuate folks sit idle instead...maybe now he's learning that killing black people in order to keep a city black is not the best way to go about it....?

Now that even lefty newspapers such as the New York Times are coming out to question some of the dire threats made by global warming "experts"; these experts have responded by...making even more dire threats:

At the leading edge of climate pessimism, the prognoses were frankly apocalyptic. "Before this century is over, billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic," predicted James Lovelock, a renowned environmental scientist. In his book The Weather Makers, Tim Flannery puts aside his essential optimism for long enough to write: "If humans pursue a business-as-usual course for the first half of this century, I believe the collapse of civilisation due to climate change becomes inevitable."

Note to readers:"Breeding Pairs" is a fantasy term used by geeky science-types whom have never stood within three feet of a girl; their dream is to be the one of the last men on Earth, forced into a situation where all remaining women survivors (beautiful ones, naturally) would be forced to copulate with them in order to propogate the species. Trust me, our "renowned enviornmental scientist" James Lovelock has already run this through his head more than once; methinks he already has his LoveShack set up near the pole....

Box office data this year suggests that filmgoers seem to be having a great time at the multiplexes. The critics, by contrast, may be shopping around for a new line of work. In reviewing "300" last week, for example, A.O. (Tony) Scott of the New York Times, said the movie was "as violent as 'Apocalypto' and twice as stupid." The situation underscores yet again the disconnect between the cinematic appetites of critics vs. those of the popcorn crowd....Scott, the Times critic, for example, predicted that the movie would become "an object of camp derision," ....Kenneth Turan"s review in the Los Angeles Times, basically a prolonged wince, also noted that "300" was "Apocalypto" violent," adding, "There is a limit to how often you can see soldiers speared and hacked to death and still stay involved."Perhaps, but the first week"s "involvement" totaled some $70 million at the box office.

So several questions present themselves: If the established media want to stay relevant, should their critics make a passing attempt to tune in to pop culture? In short, should at least someone on the reviewing staff try to be relevant...

NO and NO! It is the responsiblity of the proletariat to listen to their cultural betters in the mainstream media! Obviously, Mr. Scott in the New York Times has not been derisive enough in his criticism!

But guest columnist Neal Stephensonin today's Times points out three (liberal) social issues within "300" that most critics we unable to stomach:

• “300” is not sufficiently ironic. It takes its themes (duty, loyalty, sacrifice, the preservation of Western civilization against enormous odds) too seriously to, well, be taken seriously.• “300” is campy — meaning that many things about it can be read as sexual double entendres — yet the filmmakers don’t show sufficient awareness of this.• All of the good guys are white people and many of the bad guys are brown. (How this could have been avoided in a film about Spartans versus Persians is never explained; the distinctly non-Greek viewers at my showing seemed to have no trouble placing themselves in the sandals of ancient Spartans.)

So film critics are no longer really reviewers of the celluiod realm, but instead are social commentators trying to point out non-politically correct entertainment that must be avoided at all costs. Er, sorry folks, it seems as if nobody in the "real world" seems to give a sh*t what you guys think about...anything.

And what's Sunday Stupidity without mentioning at least one politician? Regarding Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick, simply file this one under "When you elect a Democrat, you get what you voted for":

When Patrick, 50, entered office, he decided to lease a 2007 Cadillac DTS as his official state car, replacing the Ford Crown Victoria his predecessor used; it cost the state an additional $543 each month........ a list that includes the purchase of $12,000 drapes as part of a $27,000 renovation of the governor's office at taxpayer expense, the hiring of a chief of staff for his wife, and attempts to help a controversial mortgage company that has been accused of predatory lending.

"I do have to tell you, parking is a problem. It's hard to find room for both the helicopter and the Cadillac," referring to criticism about his use of state helicopters earlier in his term, which Patrick has defended.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

I read this guest columnist essay in today's Washington Postwith some interest - A More Islamic Islam - to try to discover if author Geneive Abdo was praising a more radical Muslim agenda, or warning us against it:

A small group of self-proclaimed secular Muslims from North America and elsewhere gathered in St. Petersburg recently for what they billed as a new global movement to correct the assumed wrongs of Islam and call for an Islamic Reformation.

Well, any time the media calls a group "small" and "self-proclaimed", you know it is only because they diagree with their agenda. No one ever calls CAIR a "self-proclaimed" advocacy group...Nevertheless, here is what I perceived as what might be Miss Abdo waving a red flag at us:

...the political future of the Arab world is likely to consist of Islamic parties that are far less tolerant of what has historically been the U.S. foreign policy agenda in the region and that domestically are far more committed to implementing sharia law in varying degrees. In Europe and the United States, where Muslims have maximum exposure to Western culture, they are increasingly embracing Islamic values. In Britain, a growing number of Muslims advocate creating a court system based upon Islamic principles.

What all this means is that Western hopes for full integration by Muslims in the West are unlikely to be realized and that the future of the Islamic world will be much more Islamic than Western.Instead of championing the loud voices of the secular minority who are capturing media attention with their conferences, manifestos and memoirs, the United States would be wise instead to pay more attention to the far less loquacious majority.

But is she warning us, or cheerleading for the Islamists? Being that the Washington Postis the terrorist homepage; I knew I could assume nothing, and thus did my research. Well, a quick web search shows that while Miss Abdo tries to hide her sympathies towards Muslim domination with scholarly worldplay and think-tank jargon, she certainly has a horse in this race. From a debate between her and the esteemed Michael Ledeen back in 2003, we have the luxury of judging her words in context three years later:

Through an official U.S.-Iran dialogue, Iran might agree to open its nuclear facilities to routine International Atomic Energy Agency inspections if the United States offered incentives in return, such as the release of Iranian assets frozen since the 1979 revolution and an end to trade sanctions....

....As Iraq crumbles and anarchy erupts, Dr. Ledeen and his pals in the White House are plotting their next disaster— Iran.

A disaster, Miss Abdo, only if you are rooting for Islamist victory....and we can note with the benefit of elapsed years that your prescription for compromise, adopted by the US and UN, have resulted in Iran moving even closer to obtaining nuclear weapons. Or did you know that may be the result when you hawked this irrational policy?

And here's praise for Miss Abdo from the Islamic Bookstore, for her book "No God but God: Egypt and the Triumph of Islam":

Challenging Western stereotypes, she finds that this growing number of Islamists do not seek the violent overthrow of the government or a return to a medieval age. Instead, they believe their religious values are compatible with the demands of the modern world. They are working within and beyond the secular framework of the nation to gradually create a new society based on Islamic principles. Both fascinating and unsettling, Abdo's findings identify a grassroots model for transforming a secular nation-state to an Islamic social order that will likely inspire other Muslim nations.

I believe this "growing number" is smaller than the amount of "secular Muslims" that Abdo derides in her column. And the fact that Abdo praises Muslim Egypt - a country rich in natural treasure and history yet lies broken, poor, and corrupt under a brutal dictatorship says it all about the type of "victory" that she hopes the Islamists will achieve region (and world) wide...

Geneive Abdo is the Liaison for the Alliance of Civilizations at the United Nations. A recognized authority on Islamic political movements and the author of well-received books on Islam in Egypt and Iran, she is also a respected journalist. During nearly a decade as a correspondent in the Islamic world, her work was featured in such publications as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The Guardian, The Economist , and The International Herald Tribune. She has been a commentator on numerous news programs, including the BBC, NPR, CNN and PBS.

"Recognized authority" ? How about a "self-proclaimed" authority, to use her own words. Or is it the de facto endorsement of an alliance of far-left media outlets and anti-American organizations that creates this misnomer regarding her credentials?

Nevertheless, I have discovered the answer to the question I had while reading Abdo's column in the WaPost: She is in favor of Muslim seperatism in the United States, and supports Islamic authoritative domination in the Arab world (insanely using Egypt as a "model of success"). The blame lays with me; I should have know to expect nothing else from the webmasters of the terrorist homepage...

Roger Simon accuses Genieve Abdo of "a whopper" of a Big Lie...And Doug Rosshas even harsher words for our lovely little sharia girl:...the undercurrent of Abdo's theme is a seeming desire for the destruction of America and the stripping away of all individual freedoms. Abdo doesn't point to a model Arab government that embraces both freedom of speech and freedom to practice other religions (yes, even Christianity and Judaism).In failing to do so, Abdo markets her own version of religious extremism; a totalitarianism that rejects all other religions........She rejects the concepts of individual freedoms and instead praises the scope and direction of sharia law, which acknowledges none of the freedoms that Americans would recognize.That The Washington Post provides a forum to Abdo for her anti-American drivel is stunning -- but, truth be told, not out of character.Not stunning, good sir, if you have been reading this blog...

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks, speaks proudlyof some of his other work: Among Mohammed's claims: That he personally decapitated Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped and killed in Pakistan in 2002. Citing records released by the Pentagon on Thursday, wire services quoted Mohammed as telling investigators that he "decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew Daniel Pearl," but that the incident was not part of an al-Qaeda operation.

Officials don't doubt his claim that he beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl with what he called his "blessed right hand."

"The American Jew", indeed...

It's a phrase right out of the 1940's darkest days; brought back from the dank sewer into newfound respectability by those whom hide behind their religion (as opposed to their race) for justification of their hatreds, and by those whom find common cause (Bush-hating liberals, for instance) with the new fascism.

Anyone - anyone - who feels that these people can be reasoned with, can be negotiated with, are no better than the Chamberlains and Nazi sympathizers of the late '30's. Mohammed has made his stand, and enunciated his position clearly; any whom claim they cannot hear it, or ascribe different motivations to his words and deeds, is only collaborating with him. No other explanation is plausible.

Bruce Hoffman, a professor of security studies at Georgetown University, said Mohammed sees himself as a "reluctant warrior and justified"

Is not Mr. Hoffman, by humanizing this animal, helping him? This is no "reluctant warrior", this is a man who called his brutal execution of an innocent man "blessed". Bruce, when they come for you, I hope they hang a sign around your neck stating your true role - "collaborator"...

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Enlighten New Jersey has been doing quite the thorough jobin dissembling the recent union contracts gifted out by Governor Jon Corzine. Of course, Corzine has been touting the 1.5% contribution that union employees will now make towards their generous medical benefits as a “concession”, without noting that they will receive virtually a 35% salary increase over the length of their new contract to help them offset their tremendous new financial “burden”...

Anyway, Enlighten has all the gruesome details; it’s worth the read. I just want to make a point here – is this country, with New Jersey in the lead, really becoming the “two Americas” that Democratic hopeful John Edwards is always fretting about?

But it is not rich vs. poor where the schism is arising; it is government employees vs. private sector employees. One gets paid overtime, is almost impossible to fire, gets a guaranteed generous pension as well as the opportunity to participate in a 401(k) plan, and has bumper-to-bumper family health coverage that lasts a lifetime. Meanwhile, the private sector employees can be released into unemployment at a whim, has only what he saves out of his salary in a 401 (k) to use as a guard against poverty in old age, and pays a tremendous portion of his salary for less than stellar health care plans, limited by employer offerings.

And with the gap between the public sector salary and private sector earnings narrowing, one cannot cry about all the additional monies being made over the lifetime of a private sector employee. With the average New Jersey state employee currently (as in before Corzine’s French-kiss of a contract) earning close to $60,000/year, they are soon to be reaching levels that will make the private sector envious.

And the real crime in all of this is that in New Jersey, taxes and fees and fines are constantly being raised in order to fund these luscious public employee perks. So the very people who need to keep more of their disposable income to pay for the basic necessities of life – such as health care and retirement planning – are actually losingmore of this desperately needed money in order to fluff the pillows of those whom already have the best pension and health plans in the state.

It’s not even close to being fair; it is nothing more than a forced government redistribution of income in order to protect the benefits of a powerful voting block. But both Enlighten and I have said it many times before: In another twenty years, there will be no one left in New Jersey but state employees, and they can fight a steel cage match to the death over the few remaining financial resources.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Out of all the criticisms that race-baiter Al Sharpton could conjour up to derail Barak Obama's candidacy, this was an telling choice:

Rev. Sharpton told CBS News yesterday that he wanted Senator Obama, a Democrat of Illinois, to explain why he backed Senator Lieberman when the Connecticut lawmaker was locked in a tight race for the Democratic Party nomination for the Senate last year. "Why shouldn't the black community ask questions? Are we now being told, ‘You all just shut up?" CBS quoted Rev. Sharpton as saying. " Senator Obama and I agree that the war is wrong, but then I want to know why he went to Connecticut and helped Lieberman, the biggest supporter of the war." Rev. Sharpton's decision to criticize Mr. Obama's support last year for Mr. Lieberman is an interesting one.

Let's dig a little deeper....Is Lieberman the only Democrat that voted for the war in Iraq that Obama campaigned for/with? Unlikely; so why is Reverend Al so anxious to tie them together? Perhaps Sharpton is trying to rile the "nutroots" and remind them that Obama supported their primary foe? A bit more likely...

Well, what do the nutroots and Al Sharpton both have in common? A deeply-held anti-semitism, of course. The Kos folks amd their ilk scattered among the far left blame all of the world's ills on Israel and the "Jewish Lobby"; while Sharpton has been agitating anti-semitic crowds for years, from theCrown Heightsriots (which killed one) to the inferno at Freddy's in Manhattan (which killed five).

So the game becomes clear - 'ol Al is using the "racial codewords" that he claims to despise to turn the black vote and the extreme liberal Democratic vote away from Obama by reminding them he supported - gasp - a Jew. And since Jews are the ones (via AIPAC and all their other avenues of evil influence) who forced America to fight Iraq - to protect Israel - Obama thereby supports the war, and is simply a tool of the Jewish lobby.

Folks, the anti-semitism that lurks beneath the surface of the Democratic Party is starting to bubble, as the heat starts to rise in anticipation of the primary season. We predict it will come fully out into the open before 2007 is even out; leaving the Democrats in the unenviable position of having to alienate their far-left base, or accept their hatreds into their, ahem, "big tent".

Well, at least it will relieve Al "Sc*mbag" Sharpton of having to speak in codes....

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Oh, that wacky Hillary Clinton...she reminds me of a young, desperate, me - trying to cajole woman into intimacy no matter what the cost to my dignity. In Hillary's case, it's all about votes, of course:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton invoked the campaign of the nation's lone Catholic president, John Kennedy, last night as she talked about her challenge in becoming the first female commander-in-chief."He was smart, he was dynamic, he was inspiring and he was Catholic. A lot of people back then [1960] said, 'America will never elect a Catholic as president,' " the White House hopeful told the New Hampshire Democrats' 100 Club fund-raiser here. "But those who gathered here almost a half century ago knew better," she said. "They believed America was bigger than that and Americans would give Sen. John F. Kennedy a fair shake, and the rest, as they say, is history."Noting women are "the majority" of voters and are in the workforce in "record numbers," she added, "So when people tell me 'a woman can never be president,' I say, we'll never know unless we try."

I see three of my old techniques here:- comparing myself to someone smarter and more handsome than I (Hill's JFK reference)- offering myself up as something different(Hillary as first Madame President)- trying to conjure up the image of unimaginable pleasures ("Never know unless we try")

I salute your spirit, Hillary, as someone who has been down your torturous road before. But be forewarned - if you wind up with as many votes as I obtained lovers with our shared "technique", expect to be spending many lonely nights at home....

Incidentally, I would have no qualms whatsoever about voting to elect a woman president in 2008. Unfortunately, Condoleezza Rice has chosen not to run....

Saturday, March 10, 2007

The Washington Post continues its role as a mouthpiecefor the Palestinian party line, blaming you-know-who for all of the problems that beset the poor Hamas-loving, terrorist supporting, Jew-hating Palestinians:Gaza has been further impoverished in the past year by Israeli border restrictions and an international aid embargo. Unemployment and poverty rates have jumped sharply in the strip, a largely resourceless 140-square-mile stretch of sand dunes, warrens of gray tenements and roads cratered by Israeli artillery shells and neglect. Eight in 10 of Gaza's 1.4 million residents now rely to some extent on U.N. food aid.Er...any explanation given as to why Israel has placed these "restrictions" on Gaza? Perhaps an accounting of last summer's cross-border raids by Hamas, or the non-stop shelling of Israeli border towns by Palestinian terrorists, would explain why some roads are "cratered by Israeli artillary shells"? How about noting that Israel gave the Gazans everything the world had asked them to give - the removal of all troops, control of all remaining infrastructure, as well as financial aid packages - and they responded by voting in a terrorist group that made the destruction of Israel their number one priority?Oh, pardon me! The WaPost does add perspective...well, the perspective of the terrorist leadership of Gaza, at least - and they know who to blame for all of their woes:Palestinian officials say the growing separation is designed to prevent an economically sustainable state from emerging in Gaza and the West Bank."This is clearly Israel's intent," said Mohammed Dahlan, a powerful Fatah lawmaker from Gaza who has negotiated with Israel over the years. "It's not just a question of besieging Gaza, but of separating it from the rest of the world."...."The Israelis are trying to create a split reality on the ground," said Ahmed Bahar, 58, a Hamas founder who is now the deputy speaker of parliament.Not one quote from an Israeli of any stripe to counter this radical propoganda. Why bother, I guess - when the headline to this filth reads "Under Pressure, Palestinian Territories Pull Apart" ? That lead tells us implicitly who is applying that pressure, the story simple explains why (because Jews are hateful people who wish to tear the Palestinians apart for their own amusement, of course!), and there is no need for the WaPost to balance that out with any information from the Israeli corner - after all, this is the terrorist's homepage we are talkng about here....